Anthony Wayne Edmonds v. Commonwealth of Virginia
0657213
| Va. Ct. App. | Apr 19, 2022Background
- Task force traced an uploaded child-pornography image on Skype to an IP address owned by Anthony Edmonds; Lieutenant Kincer interviewed Edmonds and recorded a second, videotaped interview. The video was played at trial but never formally admitted into evidence.
- Edmonds voluntarily produced a Dell 2400 desktop kept in a locked basement room; he admitted a long-standing pornography problem and (at times) took responsibility for material on the computer.
- Forensic examiner Ashley Bensinger found 30 child-pornography images on the Dell: 21 in the temporary Internet cache under Edmonds’ username and 9 in a JASC photo-program cache; several recent searches and suggestive filenames were also recovered.
- Five of the 30 charged images were marked as deleted; Edmonds argued deleted files required special forensic software to access and his machine lacked that software.
- Edmonds claimed pop-up ads and innocuous browsing could explain temporary-cache images; the Commonwealth introduced evidence of recent access to JASC cache, cookies and searches indicative of child-pornography sites.
- At a bench trial Edmonds stipulated that the images met the statutory definition of child pornography; the court convicted him on one count under Code § 18.2-374.1:1(A) and twenty-nine counts as second-or-subsequent offenses under § 18.2-374.1:1(B).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Edmonds) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by relying on a videotaped interview that was never admitted | Video was played without objection and treated as if admitted; the court properly considered it | Recording was not authenticated or admitted, so court should not rely on it on appeal | Waived by failure to object; trial court and parties treated recording as admitted, so no reversal |
| Sufficiency of evidence for images marked deleted | Circumstantial indicia (admissions, ownership, locked room, user profile, recent logins, suggestive filenames/cookies) show knowledge, dominion and control over deleted images | Deleted/unallocated files were inaccessible without specialized forensics; no proof Edmonds could access them at indictment dates | Sufficient evidence supports constructive possession; Kobman distinguishable on facts; convictions affirmed |
| Sufficiency of evidence for images in temporary Internet/JASC cache | Statute criminalizes images in temporary Internet cache when ≥3 images present; caches and JASC artifacts showed recent user access (not mere pop-ups) | Cache files could be created by automatic pop-ups or third-party activity without affirmative user action | Court found forensic evidence and recent access indicators rebut pop-up theory; possession proven |
| Whether convictions fail for lack of proof of exact dates of possession | Time is not an element of possession; Commonwealth need not prove exact date | Indicia of control may not correspond to the indictment dates | Time not material; convictions may be proved on dates other than those alleged; upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Terlecki v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 13 (constructive-possession requires awareness of presence and dominion/control)
- Kobman v. Commonwealth, 65 Va. App. 304 (deleted/unallocated-space images—insufficient evidence of possession absent indicia tying defendant to possession on charged date)
- Kromer v. Commonwealth, 45 Va. App. 812 (focus on knowledge and dominion for constructive possession of digital contraband)
- Drew v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 471 (acts, statements or conduct must show awareness and control of contraband)
- Hudson v. Commonwealth, 265 Va. 505 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)